Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
SubScriber categorieS Aviationâ â¢â PublicâTransportation A I R P O R T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M ACRP SYNTHESIS 84 Transportation Network Companies: Challenges and Opportunities for Airport Operators A Synthesis of Airport Practice conSultantS PeterâMandle StephanieâBox InterVISTASâConsulting Burlingame,âCalifornia ResearchâSponsoredâbyâtheâFederalâAviationâAdministration 2017
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in transportation of people and goods and in regional, national, and international commerce. They are where the nationâs aviation sys- tem connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common oper- ating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agencies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. ACRP is modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, mainte- nance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can cooperatively address common operational problems. ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100âCentury of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary par- ticipants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant indus- try organizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Association of Airport Execu- tives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consul- tants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academy of Sciences for- mally initiating the program. ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organizations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodi- cally but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research prob- lem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily with- out compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service providers, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport industry practitioners. ACRP SYNTHESIS 84 Project A11-03, Topic S03-11 ISSN 1935-9187 ISBN 978-0-309-39010-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2017942539 Â© 2017 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessari- ly those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
TOPIC PANEL S03-11 EVA CHEONg, San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA JOEL FELDMAN, Tampa International Airport, Tampa, FL DOROTHy HARRIS, Denver International AirportâRevenue Management, Denver, CO BILL LANHAM, Washington Dulles International Airport, Dulles, VA KIRAN LIMAyE, Jacobsen/Daniels Associates/KSL LLC, Portland, OR LENARD ROBINSON, Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport, Savannah, GA SUSAN A. SHAHEEN, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA PATRICK W. MAgNOTTA, FAA Liaison ANEIL PATEL, Airports Council InternationalâNorth America Liaison CHRISTINE gERENCHER, TRB Liaison SYNTHESIS STUDIES STAFF STEPHEN R. gODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies JO ALLEN gAUSE, Senior Program Officer gAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer TANyA M. ZWAHLEN, Consultant DON TIPPMAN, Senior Editor CHERyL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant DEMISHA WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF CHRISTOPHER J. HEDgES, Director, Cooperative Research Programs LORI L. SUNDSTROM, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs MICHAEL R. SALAMONE, Manager, Airport Cooperative Research Program KAREN NEELEy, Program Associate EILEEN P. DELANEy, Director of Publications ACRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 11-03 CHAIR JOSHUA D. ABRAMSON, Easterwood Airport, College Station, TX JULIE KENFIELD, Jacobsen/Daniels Associates, LLC, Garden Ridge, TX MEMBERS DEBBIE K. ALKE, Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT gLORIA g. BENDER, TransSolutions, Fort Worth, TX DAVID A. ByERS, Quadrex Aviation, LLC, Melbourne, FL DAVID N. EDWARDS, JR., GreenvilleâSpartanburg Airport District, Greer, SC BRENDA L. ENOS, Massachusetts Port Authority, East Boston, MA LINDA HOWARD, Independent Aviation Consultant, Bastrop, TX ARLyN PURCELL, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY FAA LIAISON PATRICK W. MAgNOTTA AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION LIAISON ADAM WILLIAMS AIRPORTS CONSULTANTS COUNCIL LIAISON MATTHEW J. gRIFFIN AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONALâNORTH AMERICA LIAISON LIyINg gU TRB LIAISON CHRISTINE gERENCHER Cover figure: Examples of signage at airports for transportation network companies. Source: InterVISTAS Consulting (2016).
FOREWORD Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to- day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful infor- mation and to make this information available to the entire airport community, the Airport Cooperative Research Program authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03, âSynthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,â searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an ACRP report series, A Synthesis of Airport Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. Transportation network companies (TNCs) such as Uber, Lyft, Wingz, and others offer door-to-door, nonstop transportation via smart device apps. Customers and private vehicle drivers connect to and pay for private rides via the companyâs app. Since they initiated service in 2012, TNCs have become increasingly popular, leading to their regulation by states and other jurisdictions as well as by airports. As of December 2016, TNCs were permitted to operate at more than 90 U.S. airports. The introduction of TNCs has resulted in new opportunities for airports. They have increased the transportation options available to airport customers by (1) expanding the menu of avail- able ground transportation services and (2) offering a service that customers consider to be reliable, convenient, and comfortable. TNCs are cheaper than traditional airport ground transportation services, such as taxicabs, and provide a higher level of service than shared- ride vans. The introduction of TNCs has also increased the challenges facing airport staff. Available information indicates that at many airports TNCs are having an adverse effect on taxicab and shared-ride van businesses, airport public parking and rental car revenues, and terminal building curbside roadway operations. As the popularity of TNCs and associ- ated traffic volumes increase, these adverse effects are expected to continue and potentially become more significant. To compensate for the lack of useful published data or available information on TNC operations at airports, an online survey was conducted during fall 2016 of the airport staff members responsible for ground transportation operations at the 100 largest U.S. airports, with responses received from 72 of these airports. At 48 of these airports, TNCs have signed an airport permit, while at 19 airports TNCs are operating without an airport permit. Of the airports where TNCs have signed permits, five reported that they were signed in 2014, 23 in 2015, and 15 in 2016, while five respondents did not specify the year. Peter Mandle and Stephanie Box, InterVISTAS Consulting, Burlingame, California, col- lected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful docu- ment that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. PREFACE By Gail R. Staba Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To each participating airport, the Synthesis Team is grateful for the data and insights they shared, particularly the following airport staff who participated in telephone interviews: Large-hub airports Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, David galloway, ground Transportation Manager Denver International Airport, Herald Hensley, Director Parking and Transportation McCarran International Airport, Daniel Busch, Airport Parking Manager Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Tyler Maheu, Superinten- dent of ground Transportation Portland International Airport, Michael Huggins, Senior Manager, Landside Operations Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, gary Myers, Manager Salt Lake City International Airport, Larry Bowers, Airport Opera- tions Manager/ground Transportation San Diego International Airport, David Boenitz, Director, ground Transportation San Francisco International Airport, Abubaker Azam, Senior Managerâ Operations Services Washington Dulles International Airport, William Lanham, Landside Operations Manager Medium-hub airports Dallas Love Field, Mark Fragale, Manager II John Wayne Airport, Robert Holden, Manager, Landside Operations Mineta San JosÃ© International Airport, Bob Swensen, Airport Opera- tions ManagerâLandside Management Pittsburgh International Airport, Brian Stashak, Vice President, Termi- nal Operations, and Dawn Romitz, Manager of Terminal Operations San Antonio International Airport, Tamera Marberry, Airport Parking and ground Transportation Manager Southwest Florida International Airport, April Russ, Landside Opera- tions Manager Small-hub airports Dane County Regional Airport, Kim Jones, Deputy Airport Directorâ Finance and Administration Harrisburg International Airport, Marshall Stevens, Deputy Executive Director Memphis International Airport, Scott Schroeder, Manager of Properties In addition to the airport staff who participated in the telephone inter- views, the following airports responded to the survey: Large-hub airports Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport Charlotte Douglas International Airport Fort LauderdaleâHollywood International Airport george Bush Intercontinental Airport (Houston) HartsfieldâJackson Atlanta International Airport John F. Kennedy International Airport (New york City) Laguardia Airport (New york City) Los Angeles International Airport Miami International Airport MinneapolisâSaint Paul International Airport Philadelphia International Airport SeattleâTacoma International Airport Tampa International Airport Medium-hub airports Anchorage International Airport AustinâBergstrom International Airport Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport Cleveland Hopkins International Airport Eppley Airfield (Omaha) Jacksonville International Airport John glenn Columbus International Airport Kansas City International Airport St. Louis Lambert International Airport Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport Nashville International Airport Oakland International Airport Orlando International Airport RaleighâDurham International Airport Sacramento International Airport William P. Hobby Airport (Houston) Small-hub airports AkronâCanton Airport Albany International Airport Atlantic City International Airport Boise Airport Burlington International Airport Charleston International Airport Colorado Springs Airport El Paso International Airport Fresno yosemite International Airport gerald R. Ford International Airport (grand Rapids) greenvilleâSpartanburg International Airport Long Beach Airport Memphis International Airport Myrtle Beach International Airport Norfolk International Airport Palm Springs International Airport Pensacola International Airport RenoâTahoe International Airport Richmond International Airport Rochester International Airport Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport Spokane International Airport St. PeteâClearwater International Airport The Eastern Iowa Airport Tucson International Airport Tulsa International Airport Will Rogers World Airport (Oklahoma City)
CONTENTS 1 SUMMARy 7 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Study Purpose and Overview, 7 1.2 What Is a Transportation Network Company? 8 1.3 How Do Transportation Network Companies Operate? 10 1.4 How Do States and Local Jurisdictions Regulate Transportation Network Companies? 12 1.5 Current Regulatory Issues, 13 14 CHAPTER TWO SUMMARy OF SyNTHESIS APPROACH 2.1 Literature Search, 14 2.2 Online Survey, 14 2.3 Interviews of Airport Staff, 15 17 CHAPTER THREE HOW TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES OPERATE AT AIRPORTS 3.1 Permits/Agreements and Regulations, 17 3.2 Customer Drop-off and Pickup, 18 3.3 Vehicle Staging and Holding, 20 3.4 Airport Transportation Network Company Fees, 22 3.4.1 Annual Permit Fee, 23 3.4.2 Per-trip Fee, 23 3.4.3 Activation Fee, 24 3.4.4 Minimum Annual guarantee Amount, 24 3.5 Reporting of Transportation Network Company Trip Volumes, 24 3.6 Enforcement of Transportation Network Company Operations, 25 3.6.1 Enforcement Responsibilities, 25 3.6.2 Enforcing Airport Rules Concerning TNC Drivers, 25 3.6.3 Enforcing Airport Rules Concerning TNCs, 26 3.6.4 Confirmation of Correct Payment of Required Airport Fees, 26 3.6.5 Enforcement Responsibilities, 27 3.7 Revenues from Transportation Network Companies, 27 3.8 Changes in ground Transportation Concession Fees, 28 3.9 Transportation Network Company Terminology and Wayfinding Used by Airports, 28 3.10 Impacts of Transportation Network Companies on the Use of Other Airport Access Modes, 29 3.11 Impacts on Other ground Transportation Revenues, 30 34 CHAPTER FOUR SUMMARy OF KEy CONSIDERATIONS 35 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS
37 gLOSSARy 38 ACRONyMS 39 REFERENCES 41 APPENDIx SURVEy FORM Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.